Besides, the designer/engineer needs to be slapped for flipping the front shocks (and let the stanchions get nicked by rocks. Also notice that there is no bridge between both stanchions on the fork so expect the front axle to snap the moment you hit the first pebble on the road.

haven't upside-down forks been SOP for high end motorcycles for decades? even off-road ones?

haven't upside-down forks been SOP for high end motorcycles for decades? even off-road ones?

For different reasons.

For the off-road ones, it's because they have more than 12" of travel, the only way to get enough bushing overlap and not have the lowers extend way down below the axle is to go inverted. The other big issue is the huge doubles they ride, and when they come down or even possibly case a jump, they need the extra strength of an inverted design, in fact these usually have dynamic bushings, in that the top of the stanchion has a bushing and the top of the uppers is a surface the bushing moves against. This feature has only been used on the Monster T and Shiver SC forks to my knowledge (the dynamic bushing).

For the road bikes, realize you are looking at a huge inverted fork with 50+mm stanchions, massive crowns and axle, a HUGE distance relatively between the top and bottom crowns, and only 2-3 of travel. If you made a mountain bike fork with the same general dimensions, it would be stiff too. That's not the way it works though on mtbs, we use inverted designs for bikes with lots of travel usually, and at the lower-travel amounts it's just not structurally efficient in the first place. The moto bike also benefits a little from the unsprung weight, but when you look at the entire system, the fork would already be as massive as it is no matter if it's inverted or not. Due to the minimal amount of travel, it doesn't give up anything and loses a bit of unsprung weight, in addition to slightly better lubrication.

It's just not the same thing with mountain bikes. Inverted forks are generally a poor idea. I've owned 3 different ones, none were very good structurally. Single crown inverted forks are an especially bad idea, lacking the 2nd crown and extra bushing overlap, and the bushing overlap is usually why a designer goes to an inverted fork in the first place.

They look cool, and with enough engineering and $$$ you can make it comparable to a "right side up" fork, but with the same amount of engineering work and $$$ you could make a right-side-up fork even stiffer and lighter.

"It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

For the off-road ones, it's because they have more than 12" of travel, the only way to get enough bushing overlap and not have the lowers extend way down below the axle is to go inverted. The other big issue is the huge doubles they ride, and when they come down or even possibly case a jump, they need the extra strength of an inverted design, in fact these usually have dynamic bushings, in that the top of the stanchion has a bushing and the top of the uppers is a surface the bushing moves against. This feature has only been used on the Monster T and Shiver SC forks to my knowledge (the dynamic bushing).

For the road bikes, realize you are looking at a huge inverted fork with 50+mm stanchions, massive crowns and axle, a HUGE distance relatively between the top and bottom crowns, and only 2-3 of travel. If you made a mountain bike fork with the same general dimensions, it would be stiff too. That's not the way it works though on mtbs, we use inverted designs for bikes with lots of travel usually, and at the lower-travel amounts it's just not structurally efficient in the first place. The moto bike also benefits a little from the unsprung weight, but when you look at the entire system, the fork would already be as massive as it is no matter if it's inverted or not. Due to the minimal amount of travel, it doesn't give up anything and loses a bit of unsprung weight, in addition to slightly better lubrication.

It's just not the same thing with mountain bikes. Inverted forks are generally a poor idea. I've owned 3 different ones, none were very good structurally. Single crown inverted forks are an especially bad idea, lacking the 2nd crown and extra bushing overlap, and the bushing overlap is usually why a designer goes to an inverted fork in the first place.

They look cool, and with enough engineering and $$$ you can make it comparable to a "right side up" fork, but with the same amount of engineering work and $$$ you could make a right-side-up fork even stiffer and lighter.

Wow, this has to be a new low. Guys on an internet forum bashing a successful individual who just happens to mountain bike (which is why you all are here, let's remember). You must be really mad at something.

Yep, and they've stated that the reason is because making cast lowers is very cost prohibitive for a small company, so they are going the inverted+dynamic bushings route with some other stuff that is unique. The point is that you "can" do it, but it's much more engineering intensive, that much engineering can get you an even better "normal" fork, but they are held back by the cast lowers at this point.

"It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

2 years ago I was loading up after a ride in the fabulous Frederick MD watershed. A giant custom touring van , like the kind that National Car Renal uses to shuttle people to and from the airport to the rental lot, pulls up to the Yellow Trail trail head on Gambrill Park road. Inside was all custom decked out with flat screen high def, window tint, microbrew mini-keg tap, leather and stainless, the whole enchilada. On back was a trailer, inside trailer over a half dozen premium trail bikes, several brands. All carbon. Four Asian dudes maybe 25 y/o in the van, one guy says , "Our buddy is rich and so we just drive around the USA from Cali to Maine riding all the great stuff we can. We move east and north through the Summer after riding all Winter and Spring and in Arizona, Utah, and Colorado. "

Serious. They were pretty good riders, too.

That's awesome! At least they're making use of that kind of privilege.

It has air conditioning, a radio, two front seats and that's about it. The ideal car.

That's what I usually say when friends are telling about their new sports car.

Comments like "great heating system" does not go down well

Personally I gave up on having a car a couple of years ago.
I never got around to use it, so whenever I actually wanted to use it, it was always causing trouble.
Partly that could be due to the climate here, and the fact that the garage is reserved for bikes.

For those of you wondering about the Audi Bike...The fork is a German:A - Flame. Nearly everything on the bike is German. It has Acros hydraulic gears and Supersonic (I think that's what they're called?) brakes.

thanks to the d!ckheads who are giving me negative rep for pointing out that i am AMUSED at something.

have the balls to sign it next time.

It is amusing. I agree with you.

Not because I hate on people for being successful (quite opposite - I love money), it's because I find irony in the fact that somebody took the time and energy to accumulate, purchase a very expensive car (and probably has a handful of other toys - cars, motorcycles, boats, house(s) with all the fixin's, etc.), but yet skimps on practicality and utility.

In my opinion, a rich person with a true passion for cycling, would have a specific car for cycling - like a utility vehicle, truck, or even as something as badass as Ailuropoda's car. IF I had that sort of money, I would skip out on buying a boat, and direct that money towards a sweet MTB vehicle with all the fixin's.

When somebody is hauling bikes on their Bentley or Ferrari they either 1) Don't care about the car (which means it was a gift, because anybody who earned the money to purchase such a car would cherish it), 2) putting on airs i.e. showing off or 3) they're STUPID. In all cases, it's a slap in the face of those of us who love cycling (and would be more practical about acquiring a proper vehicle for hauling bikes, especially if you have the money to do so) and shun posers.

When somebody is hauling bikes on their Bentley or Ferrari they either 1) Don't care about the car (which means it was a gift, because anybody who earned the money to purchase such a car would cherish it), 2) putting on airs i.e. showing off or 3) they're STUPID. In all cases, it's a slap in the face of those of us who love cycling (and would be more practical about acquiring a proper vehicle for hauling bikes, especially if you have the money to do so) and shun posers.